David Bolinsky also has a message to William Dembski who has admitted in his own blog that the goal of the animator was to mimic as closely as possible the XVIVO animation without ‘crossing the line’.

Quote

William Dembski Wrote:

I expect that the producers made their video close enough to the Harvard video to get tongues awagging (Headline: “Harvard University Seeks Injunction Against Ben Stein and EXPELLED” — you think that might generate interest in the movie?), but different enough so that they are unexposed.

Given William Dembski’s uncanny ability to predict the opposite of the future, these words give comfort to those interested in science and the protection of the legal rights of the copyright owners.

LOL I love that line. And as for this:

Quote

David Bolinsky Wrote:

To Mr. Dembski: The only reason I am involved in this discussion is because I do not want the reputation of my company, hard-earned as it is, to be sullied by even oblique affiliation to your sort of smarmy ethics, if only through works of ours, purloined to fit your agenda. Last year you were charging colleges thousands of dollars to give lectures showing a copy of The Inner Life of the Cell, you claimed you “found somewhere”, with Harvard’s and XVIVO’s credits stripped out and the copyright notice removed (which is in itself a felony) and a creationist voice-over pasted on over our music (yes, I have a recording of your lecture). Harvard slapped you down for that, and yes there is a paper trail. One can only assume that had we not taken notice then, we would be debating The Inner Life of the Cell being used in EXPELLED, instead of a copy. You have enough of a colorful history that Harvard, in its wisdom, decided to ‘swat the gnat’ with as little fuss as possible. Imagine our surprise earlier this month, to see our work copied in a movie trailer for EXPELLED! And you are in the movie too! Not quite a star, but brown dwarfs are cool. XVIVO has no intention of engaging alone, in asymmetrical fighting against an ideological entity with orders of magnitude more resources than we have. That might make great theater, but would resemble a hugely expensive game of whack-a-ID. Boring!

Go and vote for your favorite tell-it-like-it-is articles about "Expelled".

ETA: One of the greatest hits on the smoking manufactroversy I've seen was in the Australian series, "The Games". In one episode they have the Tobacco Council or similarly named made-up organization offering the cash-strapped organizers a huge amount of money for advertising rights in and around the 2000 Sydney Olympic Games. The head logistics character, John, refuses to consider the offer through the episode though his budget chief keeps bringing it up. At the end, a personal representative comes to meet John to make the pitch for the tobacco interests. He enters, is introduced, and delivers a line -- at which point we realize that he is speaking with the assistance of a device to aid those who have lost their larynx to something like cancer. End of episode.

Well, it does look like they backed down the threat of an injunction blocking the release of the movie, although they leave open the possibility of suing afterwards.

Maybe they heard something about the final print version that will go (in fact, is going as we speak) out to the theaters? Note that, as far as I can tell, all the pre-screenings that have been reported so far were projected from laptop files, no prints.

If Premise had received the injunction and still came out on time with a non-violating movie, that would have been a coup. But now, if the movie comes out without the animation it's an obvious admission of guilt, and if it does come out with the animation after being warned, their liability has increased.

Well, it does look like they backed down the threat of an injunction blocking the release of the movie, although they leave open the possibility of suing afterwards.

Maybe they heard something about the final print version that will go (in fact, is going as we speak) out to the theaters? Note that, as far as I can tell, all the pre-screenings that have been reported so far were projected from laptop files, no prints.

If Premise had received the injunction and still came out on time with a non-violating movie, that would have been a coup. But now, if the movie comes out without the animation it's an obvious admission of guilt, and if it does come out with the animation after being warned, their liability has increased.

Interesting...

I followed Rich's link too, and I don't think anyone is backing down. I think DaveScot is doing what he does best: Blustering, bloviating and blowing smoke.

He took a "throw-away line" and blew it up out of proportion. He's a funny guy. He's so funny, you forgot to laugh.

--------------Come on Tough Guy, do the little dance of ID impotence you do so well. - Louis to Joe G 2/10

Gullibility is not a virtue - Quidam on Dembski's belief in the Bible Code Faith Healers & ID 7/08

It's really bizarre to watch them talk about it, and somehow manage to totally deny any wrongdoing. Can you even get any logic out of post 7? He seems to want to say that the expelled team 'somehow made a similar animation' without saying 'they copied it'.

You're basic Dembski cut-and-repost. Here's the part I found interesting:

Quote

WORLD: How did you get involved with Expelled?

STEIN: I was approached a couple of years ago by the producers, and they described to me the central issue of Expelled, which was about Darwinism and why it has such a lock on the academic establishment when the theory has so many holes. And why freedom of speech has been lost at so many colleges to the point where you can’t question even the slightest bit of Darwinism or your colleagues will spurn you, you’ll lose your job, and you’ll be publicly humiliated. As they sent me books and talked to me about these things I became more enthusiastic about participating.

Plus I was never a big fan of Darwinism because it played such a large part in the Nazis’ Final Solution to their so-called “Jewish problem” and was so clearly instrumental in their rationalizing of the Holocaust. So I was primed to want to do a project on how Darwinism relates to fascism and to outline the flaws in Darwinism generally.

As per usual, the bold is mine, all mine.

--------------I wouldn't be bothered reading about the selfish gene because it has never been identified. -- Denyse O'Leary, professional moronAgain "how much". I don't think that's a good way to be quantitative.-- gpuccio

--------------I wouldn't be bothered reading about the selfish gene because it has never been identified. -- Denyse O'Leary, professional moronAgain "how much". I don't think that's a good way to be quantitative.-- gpuccio

That sounds good, actually. The higher the gross that first night, the higher the damages requested should be if they are sued the next day, after it is confirmed that they used the plagiarized XVIVO animation for commercial purposes.

Sounds like we (well, you) should all go and see the film and pay for our (well, your) tickets. Do your bit to help XVIVO win Ben Stein's money!

I'm safe in Finland, so I won't be able to see it myself. But I've checked the exchange rates, so I can send over a couple of glass beads that should pay for about 15 of you to get in.

--------------It is fun to dip into the various threads to watch cluelessness at work in the hands of the confident exponent. - Soapy Sam (so say we all)

59Frost12258504/11/200812:27 amSomeone needs to explain to me how they get video of Meyers, Dawkins and all the Darwinian materialists saying all this stuff. I mean did Ben just go right up to them and say “hi were doing a movie called Expelled (no intelligence allowed) and its about exposing your side for the psychopaths that you are. Just for the movie’s sake can you please give us your side of the argument as blatantly and as vile as you can possibly say it?

And then they set up the HD cameras?

From what I have seen that they have captured on tape, this movie is gold.

Hmm. Maybe they lied?

Inconceivable!

And, actually, despite the popular "princess bride" meme, and the obvious sarcasm, I am using that word correctly.

Your basic Dembski cut-and-repost. Here's the part I found interesting:

Quote

WORLD: How did you get involved with Expelled?

STEIN: I was approached a couple of years ago by the producers, and they described to me the central issue of Expelled, which was about Darwinism and why it has such a lock on the academic establishment when the theory has so many holes. And why freedom of speech has been lost at so many colleges to the point where you can’t question even the slightest bit of Darwinism or your colleagues will spurn you, you’ll lose your job, and you’ll be publicly humiliated. As they sent me books and talked to me about these things I became more enthusiastic about participating.

Plus I was never a big fan of Darwinism because it played such a large part in the Nazis’ Final Solution to their so-called “Jewish problem” and was so clearly instrumental in their rationalizing of the Holocaust. So I was primed to want to do a project on how Darwinism relates to fascism and to outline the flaws in Darwinism generally.

A couple years ago? They may not have settled on the title, but it seems the premise was understood.

My name is Mark Mathis. I am a Producer for Rampant Films. We are currently in production of the documentary film, "Crossroads: The Intersection of Science and Religion."

--------------Given that we are all descended from Adam and Eve...genetic defects as a result of intra-family marriage would not begin to crop up until after the first few dozen generations. - Dr. Hugh Ross

Umm, no "Crossroads" was never the title. They used that to get scientists to participate in a pro-ID film without admitting to it being a pro-ID film. They'd already registered the expelledthemovie.com domain before requesting the interviews, and never registered any crossroadsthemovie.com or suchlike domain.

--------------I wouldn't be bothered reading about the selfish gene because it has never been identified. -- Denyse O'Leary, professional moronAgain "how much". I don't think that's a good way to be quantitative.-- gpuccio

Ignore the last post please. I didn't pay attention to where you found that image.

--------------I wouldn't be bothered reading about the selfish gene because it has never been identified. -- Denyse O'Leary, professional moronAgain "how much". I don't think that's a good way to be quantitative.-- gpuccio

Is it ironic to anyone else that the pre-EXPELLED circus is more entertaining than the actual movie?

At this point? Nah. It's now about as ironic as ten thousand spoons when all you need is a knife. Not that it's a damn bit less funny for that, though.

--------------I wouldn't be bothered reading about the selfish gene because it has never been identified. -- Denyse O'Leary, professional moronAgain "how much". I don't think that's a good way to be quantitative.-- gpuccio

Does anybody know more about this Maciej Giertych guy, who was interviewed by Ben Stein for Expelled?

I was reading his profile on Wikipedia, and came across this:

Quote

In February 2007, Giertych sparked outrage among European Union officials and Jewish organizations by publishing a brochure called "Civilizations at war in Europe" that claimed that Jews "are bilogically different" and "create their own ghettos" because they supposedly prefer to separate themselves from others.[3]. Many journalists and certain Jewish organizations considered the brochure to be anti-Semitic. During the European Parliament's session on 14 March 2007, Parliament's President [4] Hans-Gert Pöttering reprimanded Maciej Giertych for the content of his pamphlet in accordance with Rule 147 of the EP's Rules of Procedure. He said that the publication was "a serious breach of fundamental rights and, in particular, the dignity of human beings to which our institution so strongly adheres". Mr Pöttering dissociated the Parliament from the work saying that it had made no financial contribution to its publication. Several members of the Parliament have joined with the European Jewish Congress in calling for an investigation of the publishing of the pamphlet and whether Parliament funds were involved.

Now if it's true that a creationist said Jews are biologically different, then doesn't that negate the notion that Darwinism was a necessary condition for the Holocaust?

Now if it's true that a creationist said Jews are biologically different, then doesn't that negate the notion that Darwinism was a necessary condition for the Holocaust?

Of course not. Nothing can negate that for the IDists. Not even a forensically verified photograph of Hitler smiling fondly while reading a German copy of "The Design Inference" could do that. It would however suggest that either:

A. Hitler is still alive, and clearly hasn't gained any intellectual rigour in his hyper-senescence.

B. The Nazis were masters of time-travel. Possibly due to the actions of a rogue Timelord. Might even be WAD himself. The Dr. Dr. Dr.?

C. Dembski is some sort of immortal Wandering IDiot, and can only be killed via decapitation with antique bladed weaponry or upon injection with a human scale Type III secretion system.

D. Darwinists are still wrong. And Nazis. Who eat children.

--------------I wouldn't be bothered reading about the selfish gene because it has never been identified. -- Denyse O'Leary, professional moronAgain "how much". I don't think that's a good way to be quantitative.-- gpuccio

Does this mean I can create the Doc Bill Research Foundation, declare it to be not-for-profit and solicit money to enable me to "think" all day. Great Thoughts, mind you, although I think best in a new BMW.

DaveScot:This is why Harvard won’t ever take Premise to court over it. For one Premise can fight back and because Premise hired an independent artist to develop a replica there’s little chance of winning a copyright infringement suit. Second, even if Harvard did win a suit they couldn’t show any damages because they don’t sell the video and let many others use it freely without permission or protest.

DaveScot's poor understanding of copyright law aside, after the spectacular success of his last prediction:

Quote

Unless Judge Jones wants to cut his career off at the knees he isn’t going to rule against the wishes of his political allies.

it seems that we can look forward to seeing Harvard crush Premise in court.